The Big Bang Doesn't Deserve Your Faith. It Also Doesn't Deserve Your Tax Money. - Atheist Nexus2018-05-24T18:07:56Zhttp://atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/the-big-bang-doesn-t-deserve-your-faith-it-also-doesn-t-deserve?commentId=2182797%3AComment%3A2791554&x=1&feed=yes&xn_auth=noReligion is said to make good…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-04-13:2182797:Comment:27955542018-04-13T06:28:29.429Ztom sarbeckhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/TomSarbeck
<p>Religion is said to make good people do evil things. To make intelligent people do stupid things takes particle physics. </p>
<p>From Alexander Unzicker’s <em>The Higgs Fake: How Particle Physicists Fooled the Nobel Committee, 2013.</em></p>
<p></p>
<p>Religion is said to make good people do evil things. To make intelligent people do stupid things takes particle physics. </p>
<p>From Alexander Unzicker’s <em>The Higgs Fake: How Particle Physicists Fooled the Nobel Committee, 2013.</em></p>
<p></p> RIP the Standard Model--the B…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-28:2182797:Comment:27947422018-03-28T19:58:28.369ZTom Sarbeckhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/TomSarbeck74
<p>RIP the Standard Model--the Big Bang--with Its Many Untested and Untestable Hypotheses</p>
<p>“It’s a mystery to me how comets work at all.”<br></br> –Donald Brownlee, principal investigator of NASA’s Stardust Mission</p>
<p>Nothing in the observed Universe has surprised astronomers and astrophysicists more than comets. Their “dirty snowball” hypothesis, for decades their theoretical bedrock, has time after time failed to predict comet behavior and comet composition. Since 1986, when negatively…</p>
<p>RIP the Standard Model--the Big Bang--with Its Many Untested and Untestable Hypotheses</p>
<p>“It’s a mystery to me how comets work at all.”<br/> –Donald Brownlee, principal investigator of NASA’s Stardust Mission</p>
<p>Nothing in the observed Universe has surprised astronomers and astrophysicists more than comets. Their “dirty snowball” hypothesis, for decades their theoretical bedrock, has time after time failed to predict comet behavior and comet composition. Since 1986, when negatively charged ions were found in the coma of Comet Halley, comets have produced “mysteries” that have left astronomers groping for answers:<br/> 1. Comet surfaces with sharply carved relief — the exact opposite of what astronomers expected under the “dirty snowball” model.<br/> 2. Highly energetic supersonic jets exploding from comets’ nuclei.<br/> 3. The inexplicable confinement of these jets into narrow filaments, spanning great distances, up to MILLIONS of miles, defying the behavior of neutral gases in a vacuum.<br/> 4. Jets occurring on the dark sides of comet nuclei.<br/> 5. Unexpectedly high temperatures and X-ray emissions from cometary comas.<br/> 6. A short supply or complete absence of water and other volatiles on comets’ nuclei.<br/> 7. Mounting evidence for the production of the OH radical in cometary comas, due to charge exchange with the Sun (the process that misled astronomers into thinking they were seeing evidence of water removed from the surface.)<br/> 8. Mineral particles that can only be formed under extremely high temperatures — the last thing one would expect from a chunk of dirty ice arriving from the outermost reaches of the solar system.<br/> 9. Comets flaring up while in “deep freeze,” beyond the orbit of Saturn.<br/> 10. Comets disintegrating many millions of miles from the Sun.<br/> 11. Comet dust particles more finely and evenly divided than is plausible for sublimating “dirty ices.”<br/> 12. Ejection of larger particles and “gravel” that was never anticipated under the idea that comets accreted from primordial clouds of ice, gas, and dust.<br/> 13. The unexplained ability of a relatively minuscule comet nucleus to hold in place a highly spherical coma, up to millions of miles in diameter, against the force of the solar wind.</p>
<p style="text-align: right;">--from <a href="http://www.thunderbolts.info" target="_blank">www.thunderbolts.info</a></p>
<p>All of those findings are predictable features of the electric model. Few know of them because space scientists through most of the 20th century have assumed that bodies in space are electrically neutral.</p>
<p>The Electric Universe views comets as negatively charged bodies moving through the electric field of the Sun, the most positively charged object in the solar system. The most energetic cometary displays occur with comets that spend the most time in the outer regions of the solar system, where they acquire a strongly negative charge. As they race toward the Sun, moving into a more positively charged environment, the nucleus is subjected to increasing electrical stresses.</p>
<p>Why do I stay on the BB’s case?<br/> Because I am an educator and the billions of taxpayer dollars pseudoscientists are spending on futile searches for evidence are needed for real science. I was one of the many who 40 years ago cut off the flow of taxpayer money to people who wanted to dam rivers. It was a struggle.</p>
<p>For info that requires curiosity, but no math, go to <a href="http://www.newtoeu.com">http://www.newtoeu.com</a> and download the free PDF file.</p>
<p> </p> Joan, Hubble thought critical…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-22:2182797:Comment:27942162018-03-22T16:55:02.016ZTom Sarbeckhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/TomSarbeck74
<p style="text-align: left;">Joan, Hubble thought critically about red shift.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Here are his words in the 1937 Royal Astronomical Society Monthly Notices:<br></br>“If the red shifts are a Doppler shift . . . the observations as they stand lead to the anomaly of a closed universe, curiously small and dense, and, it may be added, suspiciously young.<br></br>“On the other hand, if red shifts are not Doppler effects, these anomalies disappear and the region observed appears…</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Joan, Hubble thought critically about red shift.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Here are his words in the 1937 Royal Astronomical Society Monthly Notices:<br/>“If the red shifts are a Doppler shift . . . the observations as they stand lead to the anomaly of a closed universe, curiously small and dense, and, it may be added, suspiciously young.<br/>“On the other hand, if red shifts are not Doppler effects, these anomalies disappear and the region observed appears as a small, homogeneous, but insignificant portion of a universe extended indefinitely in both space and time.“</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Georges LeMaitre, a Catholic priest who'd studied mathematics, saw Hubble's first "If...." statement and knew that if he wrote equations based on time:<br/>1. he could compute forward and predict where galaxies would be, or<br/>2. he could compute backward and know where galaxies had been,</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Wanting to support Catholicism's view of Genesis, he ignored Hubble's second "...if...." statement, computed backward and said the entire universe had once been very small.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Fundamentalist Christians in the early 1900s wanted to attack science so they could discredit Darwin and natural selection. They too saw LeMaitre's math as proof of Genesis.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Many astronomers disagreed with LeMaitre but knew that if they opposed him, they would also have to oppose millions of Christians. They wanted to do astronomy.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;">They left it to us to take on the Christians and some people who say they are atheists.</p>
<p style="text-align: left;"></p> Joan, you've known for years…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-21:2182797:Comment:27944302018-03-21T05:27:19.266ZTom Sarbeckhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/TomSarbeck74
<p>Joan, you've known for years how to think critically.</p>
<p>It requires only that you tell yourself or others, "I don't know, and I won't know until I have empirical evidence."</p>
<p></p>
<p>Joan, you've known for years how to think critically.</p>
<p>It requires only that you tell yourself or others, "I don't know, and I won't know until I have empirical evidence."</p>
<p></p> Jotham Timothy Bessey, I agre…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-20:2182797:Comment:27944252018-03-20T20:17:39.816ZJoan Denoohttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/JoanDenoo
<p>Jotham Timothy Bessey, I agree with your statements, <br></br>1. "The Big Bang is one of the theories that I thought 'Seriously dude? What were you smoking?'"<br></br>2. "Overall steady but constantly changing."<br></br>3. "Red Shift - When Edward Hubble noticed the red shift in light for galaxies, why did he attribute it to the Doppler effect?"<br></br>4. "Microwave background - Considering it was accidentally found and then used to back up the big bang theory, puts it on the same level as the redshift…</p>
<p>Jotham Timothy Bessey, I agree with your statements, <br/>1. "The Big Bang is one of the theories that I thought 'Seriously dude? What were you smoking?'"<br/>2. "Overall steady but constantly changing."<br/>3. "Red Shift - When Edward Hubble noticed the red shift in light for galaxies, why did he attribute it to the Doppler effect?"<br/>4. "Microwave background - Considering it was accidentally found and then used to back up the big bang theory, puts it on the same level as the redshift observation." I remember when the report of finding the sound in the universe and attributing it to the big bang theory; why? I am not able to find the video of that original report, but I remember it, vividly.<br/>5. "I don't have enough information to talk about the mixture of elements one." Or for me, 2, 3, &amp; 4 as well as #5 &amp; 6. <br/>6. "Further away Galaxies look different than those closer therefor older galaxies are different than newer ones." I just do not know enough about astronomy to be able to give an affirmative to all the questions. <br/>I want to be able to use critical thinking to arrive at a definitive conclusion, yes or no. It just does not happen to me. What I can do is read and listen to as many arguments as people are able and willing to share; I still can be fooled. Further away Galaxies look different than those closer therefor older galaxies are different than newer ones.<br/>If I were to sit down with a pro-big-banger or an anti-big banger, I am vulnerable to be duped, not because I am incapable of critical thinking, but because I do not know enough to say, "Yay," or "Nay." I have to rely on others to look at the evidence, evaluate it, and advise me as to their opinion. OPINION! When does opinion turn into fact, truth, or certainty?</p>
<p><br/>Word Count 324</p> Here are Edwin Hubble's words…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-17:2182797:Comment:27941362018-03-17T05:53:34.052ZTom Sarbeckhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/TomSarbeck74
<p>Here are Edwin Hubble's words in the 1937 Royal Astronomical Society Monthly Notices:</p>
<p>“If the red shifts are a Doppler shift . . . the observations as they stand lead to the anomaly of a closed universe, curiously small and dense, and, it may be added, suspiciously young.</p>
<p>“On the other hand, if red shifts are not Doppler effects, these anomalies disappear and the region observed appears as a small, homogeneous, but insignificant portion of a universe extended indefinitely in…</p>
<p>Here are Edwin Hubble's words in the 1937 Royal Astronomical Society Monthly Notices:</p>
<p>“If the red shifts are a Doppler shift . . . the observations as they stand lead to the anomaly of a closed universe, curiously small and dense, and, it may be added, suspiciously young.</p>
<p>“On the other hand, if red shifts are not Doppler effects, these anomalies disappear and the region observed appears as a small, homogeneous, but insignificant portion of a universe extended indefinitely in both space and time.“</p> Dawg, a science teacher’s say…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-03:2182797:Comment:27928872018-03-03T13:24:45.432Ztom sarbeckhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/TomSarbeck
<p>Dawg, a science teacher’s saying something is evidence is not evidence.</p>
<p>That’s true of religion teachers too.</p>
<p>Your Premise 0, teachers always tell the truth, is not true.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Dawg, a science teacher’s saying something is evidence is not evidence.</p>
<p>That’s true of religion teachers too.</p>
<p>Your Premise 0, teachers always tell the truth, is not true.</p>
<p></p> https://study.com/academy/les…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-03:2182797:Comment:27929802018-03-03T06:52:49.085ZDyslexic's DOGhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/DislexicDoggy
<p><a href="https://study.com/academy/lesson/evidence-for-the-big-bang-theory-background-radiation-red-shift-and-expansion.html" target="_blank">https://study.com/academy/lesson/evidence-for-the-big-bang-theory-background-radiation-red-shift-and-expansion.html</a></p>
<p></p>
<p><a href="https://study.com/academy/lesson/evidence-for-the-big-bang-theory-background-radiation-red-shift-and-expansion.html" target="_blank">https://study.com/academy/lesson/evidence-for-the-big-bang-theory-background-radiation-red-shift-and-expansion.html</a></p>
<p></p> Electronics is my field of ex…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-03:2182797:Comment:27931282018-03-03T06:41:44.132ZDyslexic's DOGhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/DislexicDoggy
<p>Electronics is my field of expertise and spectrum analysers don't discriminate.</p>
<p>And it is not spectrum analysers that they used to get the red shift as spectrum analysers are used for determining the contents of gases, but frequency analysers from radio telescopes and , the wavelength of light detected is in the red spectrum, and can be analysed without a spectrum analyser, so the light frequencies reaching us from those galaxies are in the red spectrum and that can be checked by…</p>
<p>Electronics is my field of expertise and spectrum analysers don't discriminate.</p>
<p>And it is not spectrum analysers that they used to get the red shift as spectrum analysers are used for determining the contents of gases, but frequency analysers from radio telescopes and , the wavelength of light detected is in the red spectrum, and can be analysed without a spectrum analyser, so the light frequencies reaching us from those galaxies are in the red spectrum and that can be checked by multiple means for validation. The Doppler effect is valid. </p>
<p></p>
<p>They pick up all colours according to their intensity and that can be checked against the radio frequency received by radio telescopes for validation.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Our vision discriminates, in that it intensifies yellows and greens and we cannot see ultraviolet, yet if we had our lens removed, we would see a totally different spectrum, and ultraviolet, the world looks different without the lens.</p>
<p></p> Jotham, I looked at it twice…tag:atheistnexus.org,2018-03-02:2182797:Comment:27931242018-03-02T18:39:16.464Ztom sarbeckhttp://atheistnexus.org/profile/TomSarbeck
<p>Jotham, I looked at it twice and the scenes showing the Milky Way persuaded me that it was a well-executed computer animatiion. We mortals won’t ever have a vehicle that can approach and go around our home galaxy at the speed portrayed.</p>
<p>Changing gears, have you seen any of NASA’s Astronomy Photos/Pictures of the Day. You can find them by searching on “nasa apod’ or “NASA APOD’. The pic changes each day, at about nine pm I think. I use them as my browser’s home page so I see a pic each…</p>
<p>Jotham, I looked at it twice and the scenes showing the Milky Way persuaded me that it was a well-executed computer animatiion. We mortals won’t ever have a vehicle that can approach and go around our home galaxy at the speed portrayed.</p>
<p>Changing gears, have you seen any of NASA’s Astronomy Photos/Pictures of the Day. You can find them by searching on “nasa apod’ or “NASA APOD’. The pic changes each day, at about nine pm I think. I use them as my browser’s home page so I see a pic each time I go on the web.</p>
<p></p>